Prisoners: Mental Health Care

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they accept the finding of the Chief Inspector of Prisons that 41 per cent of the patients in prison healthcare centres in three local prisons should have been in secure National Health Service accommodation; and what corrective action they intend to take.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Government recognise the importance of improving mental health services for prisoners. Where prisoners are so seriously ill that they need to be treated in hospital they should be assessed and transferred as quickly as possible. The Government have put mechanisms in place to monitor this process. But, just as in the wider community, the majority of those with mental illness do not need hospital care, and the Government are also working, through initiatives such as the prison mental health in-reach project, to improve the range and quality of services available to prisoners.

Custody Plus Scheme

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What will be the cost of implementing and running the custody plus scheme; and what sums have been set aside in the Home Office budget to ensure that custody plus can be fully implemented following the passage of the Criminal Justice Bill.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The majority of the costs of implementing custody plus (both the costs of introducing the new sentence and of running it thereafter) fall on the Probation Service, which needs to build up capacity to manage an increased caseload of approximately 50,000 per annum as a result of this new sentence. Current estimates are that an additional £19 million, £70 million, £136 million, £175 million, £186 million and £194 million for the financial years 2003–04, 2004–05, 2005–06, 2006–07, 2007–08 and 2008–09 respectively will be needed for the Probation Service to implement all the sentencing provisons in the Bill. Costs are expected to be in the order of £194 million annually thereafter. We are committed to delivering these reforms and the costs of implementation will be met from within departmental settlements, although final decisions regarding phasing to prove for effective delivery have not been made. Implementation planning is being taken forward within the Correctional Services Review.

Prison Service Rules and Regulations

Lord Lamont of Lerwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether rules and regulations derived from Prison Service orders but not directly included in the Prison Service rules have the power of law; and whether they are legally enforceable; and
	Whether there is a requirement for Prison Service orders and subsequent changes to them to be laid before Parliament in the same way as drafts and amendments to statutory instruments (that is, the Prison Rules) must be laid before Parliament under the Prison Act 1952; and
	Whether the rules and regulations derived from Prison Service orders but not directly included in the Prison Rules have the authority of Parliament; and
	Which body, if any, that is independent of the Prison Service has the function of monitoring rules and regulations that have a major impact on prisoners' rights in relation to fairness, reasonableness and compliance with human rights and other legislation.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: It is the obligation of the Prison Service, as a public authority, to ensure that its rules and regulations comply with the Human Rights Act 2000. The Prison Rules and Young Offender Rules are subject to scrutiny by Parliament, but there is no requirement for Prison Service orders or Prison Service instructions, or subsequent changes, to be laid before Parliament. While the instructions within Prison Service orders are neither primary legislation nor statutory instruments they are capable of having a legal effect. Prison Service orders and instructions are publicly available on the Internet and in prison libraries.
	Prisons are inspected by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, who may also conduct thematic inspections and may comment on regulations and their application and make recommendations. Boards of visitors supervise the operation of the prisons for which they are responsible and report annually with recommendations. Individual prisoners who believe their rights have been infringed can complain to the local board of visitors and to the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman. They can also pursue the matter through the courts.

Firearms Register

Baroness Blatch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made since 29 October on the establishment of a central register of individuals who have applied for, or who have been granted, a shotgun or firearm certificate required under Section 39 of the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997; and when the register will become fully operational.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Police Information Technology Organisation (PITO) is currently considering the responses to the notice it issued seeking non-binding expressions of interest for a retender. Urgent work is also in hand to see whether the project's aims and objectives can be met before summer 2004.

Crimes of Violence in the West End

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many crimes of violence were reported from the West End Central and Charing Cross police sectors of the Metropolitan Police in 2001; and
	How many parking attendants were assaulted in the West End during 2001; and how many of those who committed these offences were charged with racially aggravated offence within the meaning of Section 39 of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Numbers of crimes reported to individual police sectors are not collected centrally.

Immigration Detainees

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why immigration detainees who have not been charged with or committed any criminal offence are still being held in prison.

Lord Filkin: Our policy on the use of prison accommodation to hold immigration detainees was set out in our White Paper Secure Borders, Safe Haven—Integration with Diversity in Modern Britain. We made it clear that, although the routine use of prison accommodation for immigration detainees had ended at the start of 2002, there would remain a need to hold small numbers of individual detainees in prison for reasons of security and control. There has been no change in that policy. bjc

Deer Management on Exmoor

Lord Mancroft: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What estimates have been made of the costs of a deer management scheme on Exmoor; and
	When the Minister will publish an impact assessment on the integrity of the deer herd on Exmoor in the event of a ban on hunting.

Lord Whitty: Local deer management schemes can be attractive to local land owners and occupiers where they help to manage wild deer populations in the interests of undertakings such as agriculture or forestry. We have not estimated the costs of such schemes.
	The aim of the Hunting Bill is to deal with the issue of cruelty. The Burns report concluded that, in the event of a ban on hunting, some overall reduction in total deer numbers might occur unless an effective deer management strategy were implemented. The Government's view is that appropriate control of deer populations can best be considered through local deer management groups. These groups operate both in areas where there is deer hunting and in other areas where there are healthy wild deer herds. Advice on setting up deer management groups is provided by the Deer Initiative, a partnership sponsored by the Forestry Commission. Partners in the initiative include Defra and English Nature, as well as forestry and agricultural interests.

Hunting Bill: Background Research

Baroness Golding: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What research has been carried out into alternative methods of culling wild mammals in order to enable the registrar proposed under the Hunting Bill to reach an objective and scientifc judgment as to the method of least suffering; and
	What proposals are being considered to ensure that where hunting is prohibited alternative methods of species management are conducted in such a way that animal suffering is not increased and that best practice is always observed; and
	What further research recommended by the report of the Burns Committee of Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs in England and Wales of 2000 has been carried out; when it will be published; and whether copies will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses; and
	When any further research recommended by the report of the Burns Committee into Hunting with Dogs in England and Wales of 2000 not yet carried out will be carried out.

Lord Whitty: The proposal in the Hunting Bill is to establish a system for a registrar to make a case-by-case decision in regard to hunting activities to ensure that cruelty is prevented. It will be for the applicant to demonstrate to the registrar that no other available method of control causes significantly less pain, suffering or distress than the proposed hunting. The standard for the cruelty test is set out in the Bill. The definition of cruelty is well established in law: it is the causing of unnecessary or avoidable suffering.
	The registrar must be satisfied that the proposed hunting would be for one of the purposes set out in Clause 8(1) of the Bill and that that purpose cannot reasonably be achieved by a method that would cause less suffering. He would do this by an objective assessment of the evidence provided by both the applicant and any evidence provided by a designated animal welfare body; and be guided by any relevant directions given by the tribunal in previous cases. If appropriate, on questions of bio-diversity the registrar may seek advice from English nature or the Countryside Council for Wales.
	Evidence relating to some of the issues mentioned in the Burns report was presented to the hearing in September 2002, including detailed studies of the humaneness and effectiveness, injuries, wounding and non-target captures associated with different methods. This information would be available to the registrar.
	The Bill is concerned about hunting with dogs and not directly the issue of improving alternative methods of pest control. However, an automatic condition of all registrations is that reasonable steps must be taken to ensure that any wild mammal which is shot during the course of registered hunting must be shot by a competent marksman. Competence is a matter to be determined on the facts of each individual case and will reflect the appropriateness of the experience, skill and qualifications of the marksman to the difficulty of the shooting being carried out. As that difficulty will vary depending on which species is being hunted and as a result of local factors, the Bill does not prescribe a single standard of what is competent. lynne

Hunting Bill: Rio Declaration on Environment and Development

Lord Hardy of Wath: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have been advised that a ban on deer hunting and coursing was compatible with the United Kingdom's obligations under the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development 1992, with specific reference to Principle 22 of that declaration; and, if so, by whom.

Lord Whitty: The UK Government are committed to abiding by the principles set down in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development of 1992 and are satisfied that the provisions of the Hunting Bill are compatible with the declaration.

St Andrews Golf Club

Lord Faulkner of Worcester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St Andrews complies with the criteria for governing body status laid down by the sports councils of the four home countries of the United Kingdom.

Baroness Blackstone: The home sports councils deal with applications from organisations seeking recognition as United Kingdom or home country governing bodies. The Royal and Ancient Golf Club at St Andrews is the international governing body for golf (with the exception of the United States of America) and as such the sports councils have no authority over the body. The body therefore would not need to, and has not applied for, recognition by the Sports Councils. It is not possible to say if all requirements are met without a detailed application.

NHS: Delayed Discharge and EmergencyRe-admission

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2 December (WA77), why the information on the Department of Health website about delayed discharge and emergency re-admission does not include the data provided by primary care trust areas; and whether in future it will do so.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The quarterly headline figures appearing on the Department of Health's website provide a high level summary of performance against a wide range of measures. Quarterly information to primary care trust level on delayed discharges is made available to the Library in response to Parliamentary Questions. lynne

Diabetes National Service Framework Delivery Strategy

Lord Burlison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to publish the Diabetes National Service Framework Delivery Strategy.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: We are publishing the Diabetes National Service Framework Delivery Strategy today, just 13 months after publishing the Diabetes National Service Framework Standards. An implementation group of outside experts has helped us to develop the delivery strategy. This is an important NSF and the first to be published under the Shifting the Balance of Power reforms. As such, it needed to be developed in a new way.
	The delivery strategy confirms the targets in Improvement, Expansion and Reform: the next 3 years, putting in place registers, education and advice to support systematic treatment regimes and ensuring a systematic eye-screening programme to national standards.
	These are the first steps in reaching national diabetes standards for services which lead to fewer people developing diabetes and better care for those who have it; are centred around the needs of people with diabetes, developed in partnership with health care staff, equitable, integrated and focused on delivering the best outcomes for the person with diabetes; and offer care that is structured and pro-active, providing people with the support they need to manage their own condition.
	The delivery strategy offers a framework for the NHS to build capacity to put in place building blocks for the NHS to reach the national service framework (NSF) standards over the next 10 years. In addition to the two targets, key elements are setting up a local diabetes network, or similarly robust mechanism, which involves identifying local leaders and appointing and resourcing network managers, clinical champions and a person(s) with diabetes to champion the views of local people; reviewing the local baseline assessment, establishing and promulgating local implementation arrangements with a trajectory to reach the standards; participating in comparative local and national audit; undertaking a local workforce skills profile of staff involved in the care of people with diabetes and developing education and training programmes with the local workforce development confederation.
	As announced in the delivery strategy, we plan to appoint a national clinical director for diabetes this spring to provide both national leadership and support to localities in delivering the national service framework.
	Copies of the Diabetes National Service Framework Delivery Strategy will be placed in the Library.

Free Prescriptions and Tax Credits

Lord Tomlinson: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What will be the position regarding entitlement to free prescriptions when new tax credits are introduced in April.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: When new tax credits start from next April—working tax credit and child tax credit—the arrangements for entitlement to help with health costs via tax credits will continue largely the same as now. Families (single people or couples) who get working tax credit and child tax credit or working tax credit with a disability addition and whose income is below a certain limit will be entitled to full help with health costs.
	In addition, families who cannot get working tax credit because they do not work 16 hours per week but get child tax credit and whose income is below the same limit will also be entitled to full help with health costs. This will include families whose income support stops when they start to get child tax credit.
	The income limit will be based on the family's gross annual income; that is, income for the year before tax and national insurance are taken off. For tax credit awards, which start from April 2003, the income limit will be £14, 200 gross per year. This is around the same income level as now after taking account of inflation and 2002 Budget changes to tax and national insurance. lynne
	Currently the Inland Revenue sends out a tax credit exemption certificate to families who are entitled to full help with health costs. For awards of the new tax credits, the Prescription Pricing Authority (in Newcastle) will send out exemption certificates on behalf of all the health departments. Families in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland getting new tax credits who are entitled to full help with health costs will all be sent their exemption certificates by the Prescription Pricing Authority on the basis of information provided by the Inland Revenue.
	The Inland Revenue will include information for the public in a leaflet to be sent out with new tax credit awards.

Irish Government: Respect for Traditions

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 7 November (WA174) concerning the Irish Government's respect for tradition, what were the 137 organisations involved in a wide range of cross-community education research and outreach programmes in 1999 and 2000; how much each received and for what project; what percentage went to groups in the Irish Republic; and what was the equality proofing for the allocation.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Details of all grants made from the Reconciliation Fund from 1999 to August 2002 are available on the Irish Government's website at www.iveagh.irlgov.ie

Irish Government: Respect for Traditions

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 7 November (WA174-175), what progress has been made by the interdepartmental committee established in January 1998 to develop the Battle of the Boyne site; what is the purpose of the committee; who are its members; how much it has spent; and what are the grounds for considering that its progress has been good.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The mandate of this interdepartmental committee is to examine how best to develop the historic Battle of the Boyne. The committee is making progress on this historic project, which has unique symbolic significance for the Unionist tradition in Ireland. Membership of the committee is made up of representatives of the Departments of Foreign Affairs, the Taoiseach, arts, heritage, Gaeltacht and the island, environment and local government as well as the Office of Public Works and Bord Failte.

Belfast Agreement

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 6 November (WA127), who are the parties to the Belfast Agreement, what are the obligations of the Irish Government under the Belfast Agreement; and to what extent, if at all, they consider that the Irish Government have honoured their obligations.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The parties to the Belfast Agreement are those political parties represented in the negotiations that took place between 1996 and 1998 who remained at the conclusion of the talks and made clear their support for the agreement, along with the British and Irish Governments. The obligations of the Irish Government are as set out in the agreement (and there are other obligations on the two governments in the international agreement concluded at the same time). The Belfast Agreement is still in the course of fulfilment, but we believe that the Irish Government, like the British, have made very substantial headway in meeting their obligations. lynne

Irish Government: Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 7 November (WA173) concerning the Human Rights Commission in the Republic of Ireland, what is meant by the "Good Friday Agreement"; whether this is the Belfast Agreement; if so, what they consider the appropriate title to be; and what is meant in the answer by "(North and South)".

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The agreement between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, Northern Ireland and the Government of Ireland is referred to as both ("The Belfast Agreement") and the ("Good Friday Agreement"). References to North and South within the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 7 November (WA173) relate to the geographical jurisdictions of Northern Ireland and Southern Ireland.

Irish Government: Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In view of the undertaking in the Belfast Agreement of 1998 signed by the Government of the Irish Republic in which the Irish Government said they would take steps to further strengthen the protection of human rights to at least an equivalent level of protection as in Northern Ireland, what steps have been taken to date.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The steps which have been taken by the Irish Government in accordance with the obligations set out in the section entitled "Rights, Safeguards and Equality of Opportunity" in the Belfast Agreement include: establishment of a Human Rights Commission as provided for in the Human Rights Commission Acts 2000 and 2001; preparation of legislation (European Convention on Human Rights Bill, 2001) which is currently before the Dail to give further effect to the convention of Irish law; ratification of the Council of Europe Framework Convention on National Minorities; enactment of the Employment Equality Act 1998; and enactment of the Equal Status Act 2002.

Ireland: Reference to the Two States

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 28 November (WA68), whether they will in future refer to the two states in the island of Ireland by their legal titles.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: I refer the noble Lord to the Answer given on 7 November (WA171-72).

Northern Ireland: Learning Disabilities

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people in Northern Ireland are classified as having learning disabilities; which organisations provide support and help for these people; what steps are being taken to improve facilities included at Muckamore Abbey and Stradreagh Hospital; and whether more funding has been allocated.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: There are 9,280 people with a learning disability in contact with health and social services trusts. In addition to statutory health and social services, there are a number of voluntary organisations, including Mencap and the Down's Syndrome Association, providing a range of support and help for these people.
	RRI (Reinvestment and Reform Initiative) funding of £5.1 million has been secured to enable the first phase of the redevelopment of Muckamore Abbey Hospital to commence. This will provide for a 35-bedded specialist admissions and assessment unit and a 23-bedded specialist forensic service. RRI funding of £3.6 million has also been secured for the replacement of the current Stradreagh Hospital with a 43-bed in-patient treatment assessment unit, a 20-place challenging behaviour unit and a five-place rehabilitation unit.
	Funding for the learning disability programme of care has increased from £89 million in 1998–99 to £101 million in 2001–02.

North/South Ministerial Council: Equality Scheme

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether a draft equality scheme was agreed at the North/South Ministerial Council meeting on 14 June; and, if so, whether it applies to both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Section 75 and Schedule 9 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 impose statutory duties concerning equality of opportunity and good relations on the North/South Language Body in carrying out its functions relating to Northern Ireland.
	A draft equality scheme for the North/South Language Body was approved by the North/South Ministerial Council at the Language Sector meeting on 14 June 2002 and subsequently by the Equality Commission on 26 November 2002.
	The equality scheme explains how the North/South Language Body proposes to fulfil these statutory obligations, and a copy has been placed in the Library.

Use of Irish in Official Business Guidance

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the purpose of a document The Use of Irish in Official Business prepared and circulated by the Linguistic Diversity Branch of the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure for Northern Ireland, dated 21 June; to whom it was circulated; and what follow-up there has been.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: A document entitled Draft Interim Guidance on the Use of Irish in Official Business was circulated under cover of internal minute, dated 21 June 2001, to officials for comment. The draft document was designated to assist Ministers in the devolved administration agree on practical steps departments might take to fulfil Government's obligations under Part III of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Language in respect of Irish. Interim guidance was issued to all departments on 6 July 2001.

Northern Ireland: Weston Park Discussions

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 12 March (WA 61) which indicated that there was no agreement on Northern Ireland at Weston Park in summer 2001, what was the package of measures put to parties on 1 August 2001, and what was the response.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The package of measures presented to the parties on 1 August 2001 set out proposals by the British and Irish Governments in four areas—policing, normalisation, the stability of the institutions and decommissioning—together with a draft statement which the parties would issue in the event that the overall package was acceptable. Not all the parties, however, accepted those proposals.

Northern Ireland: Post-primary Arrangements

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 2 December (WA 88), whether the wishes of parents, teachers and the community will be the basis for the development of new post-primary arrangements which meet the educational needs of all children in Northern Ireland.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: In developing new post-primary arrangements the Government will take account of the full range of views expressed in all the strands of the Burns consultation, including those of parents, teachers, the community, our education partners, schools, churches and political parties.

Belfast Agreement: Cross-Border Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government: bjc
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 7 November concerning the salary scales for chief executives of cross-border implementation bodies (WA167), what are the current salaries of the chief executives; and how much each chief executive incurred last year in expenses.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The following table details the current salaries of the chief executives of the implementation bodies and their expenses for calendar year 2001.
	
		
			 CEO Expenses 2001 CEO Current Salary 
			 Loughs Agency £1,396.31 £53,511 
			 Special EU 
			 Programmes 
			 Body £10,071 £66,953 
			 Trade and Business 
			 Development £5,917.14 £57,822 
			 Waterways Ireland £7,246.96 £70,725 
			 Food Safety 
			 Promotion Board £5,445 (sterling 
			 equivalent) £54,042 (sterling 
			 equivalent) 
			 Foras Na Gaeilge Not in post £54,138 (sterling 
			 equivalent) 
			 Tha Boord o 
			 Ulster-Scotch Not in post Not in post 
		
	
	CEOs in bodies based in RoI have their salaries/expenses paid in euros—the table reflects the sterling equivalent in these cases.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many cases the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission took under Section 70 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 in 2001-02; what were those cases; what was the outcome; and how many cases they refused to assist in that period.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission's annual report, copies of which were placed in the Library, contains the answer to the noble Lord's Question. I refer him to pages 39 and 40.

Belfast Agreement: Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, when the Northern Ireland Assembly was suspended on 14 October, the six implementation bodies created by an agreement on 8 March 1999, were also effectively suspended given paragraph 5 of the Declaration of Support of the Belfast Agreement and the second recital to the relevant 8 March 1999 agreement.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: No. The bodies continue to discharge important statutory functions. The two governments concluded an exchange of notes on 19 November 2002 relating to the implementation bodies and Tourism Ireland Limited during suspension. A copy of that exchange has been placed in the Library, as has the statement of clarification issued by the two governments following their meeting in Dublin on 18 December 2002.

Northern Ireland: Linguistic Diversity

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In view of the Belfast Agreement, which promised equality between Irish and Ulster Scots, whether the Linguistic Diversity Branch of the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure has been involved with other departments in the implementation of policy concerning language.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Linguistic Diversity Branch is an administrative unit of the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL). DCAL chairs an interdepartmental group on the implementation of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. DCAL is represented on the Promoting Social Inclusion (PSI) Working Group on Race Equality where it advises on matters relating to the languages of the minority ethnic communities in Northern Ireland. In addition, DCAL advises the PSI Working Group on Disability in relation to British and Irish sign language. DCAL contributes as appropriate to consultation exercises generated by NICS and other departments. Bill

North/South Ministerial Council: Reports and Statements

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton on 5 December (WA126) concerning the North/South Ministerial Council, under what legislation any reports and statements will be laid before Parliament.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: As explained in the Answer given on 5 December (WA126), the agreement between the British and Irish Governments contained in an exchange of letters on 19 November provides that any reference in the implementation bodies agreement to the Assembly shall be read as a reference to the United Kingdom Parliament. Where the agreement provides for reports and statements to be laid before the Assembly, such reports and statements, are during suspension, to be laid before Parliament. That will become a statutory requirement when the agreement made by the exchange of letters is incorporated into the domestic law of Northern Ireland by designation under paragraph 10 of the schedule to the Northern Ireland Act 2000. That designation will shortly be made by the Secretary of State.

Northern Ireland: Language Implementation Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 9 December (WA2) concerning the two parts of the Language Implementation Body, whether the answer is yes or no.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The answer is yes, except in the matter of funding, where there is an agreed percentage contribution from each of the sponsoring departments to each part of the Language Implementation Body.

North/South Ministerial Council: Terminology

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 9 December (WA4) concerning the North/South Ministerial Council, which part of the title of the Council "North and South" refers to the administration in the most northerly part of the island of Ireland; and whether those titles "North and South" are appropriate.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The title of the North/South Ministerial Council is used to embrace the Northern Ireland administration and that of the Republic of Ireland. The words "North" and "South" both in the title and common, well-understood usage, are not intended to have geographical precision. The use of those words in this context is appropriate.

North/South Ministerial Council:Suspension of Assembly

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	During the three previous suspensions of the Northern Ireland Assembly under the Northern Ireland Act 2000, what happened to the North/South Ministerial Council and to the six implementation bodies.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: During the three previous suspensions, the functions conferred by Section 52 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 could not be exercised: the North/South Ministerial Council was not able to meet.
	During those suspensions, the implementation bodies continued to carry out their functions in accordance with the implementation bodies agreement made between the two governments.

Government Policy Statements 1997–2001

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will place in the Library of the House those parts of any statement, speech or publication made by any current Ministers between 1997 and the general election of 2001 which concerned (a) further privatisation of public services; (b) top-up fees for graduate courses; (c) revenue raising by foundation hospitals; and (d) changes to the laws concerning industrial disputes.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: I regret that this information is not collected centrally.

Ulster-Scots Agency Interim Chief Executive

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Under what circumstances the interim chief executive of the Ulster-Scots Agency, appointed in 1999, was retired; and whether there were any outstanding matters concerning his handling of the accounts and the staff of the agency.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The interim chief executive decided to take early retirement. There were no major outstanding matters in regard to the accounts of the agency. There was one outstanding staffing matter.

Northern Ireland: Digital Hearing Aids

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 10 December (WA25) about digital hearing aids in Northern Ireland, when funds will be made available for the supply of digital hearing aids.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Following the recent budget announcement, £1 milllion is to be made available in 2003–04 for the introduction of digital hearing aids in Northern Ireland. Provision of these aids will commence in September 2003.

Waterways Ireland: Canal Development

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made on the Grand Canal, Royal Canal and Barrow navigation by Waterways Ireland; when they will be completed; what will be the cost; and what are the benefits for United Kingdom taxpayers.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Waterways Ireland continues to develop the Grand Canal, Royal Canal and Barrow navigation as a multi-purpose amenity and recreation resource offering facilities for navigation, angling, walking, canoeing and other activities for the benefit of the general public.
	The Grand Canal is open to navigation. Waterways Ireland's current capital works programme includes embankment strengthening, bank protection measures, repairs to structures, dredging to improve navigable depth and installation of landing jetties above and below locks with associated landscaping.
	The Barrow navigation is also open to navigation. Waterways Ireland's current capital works programme includes dredging to improve navigable depth on the lateral canals and river navigation plus the installation of landing jetties and repairs to structures.
	The Royal Canal, which was closed to navigation in 1960, has undergone a phased restoration programme since 1987 and 70 miles of the 90-mile long canal are now open to navigation. bjc
	Waterways Ireland's current capital works programme includes lock gate installation, bog embankment repairs, bridge construction, sourcing additional water supplies and installation of landing jetties.
	Funding for capital works for the Grand Canal, the Royal Canal and the Barrow navigation is provided by the Irish Government under the National Development Plan (2000–06) and the amount allocated under this plan was 20 million euros in 1999 terms.
	There are many benefits to the United Kingdom taxpayer. One of the most significant is the fact that the headquarters for Waterways Ireland is located in Enniskillen and when fully staffed will employ some 70 people.

Saints and Scholars IntegratedPrimary School

Lord Kilclooney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many pupils attend Saints and Scholars Integrated Primary School in Armagh City; how many at present are (a) Protestant and (b) Roman Catholic; and how many pupils have left this school since 1 September.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The information requested is as follows:
	
		
			  Current Enrolment Number of Protestant pupils Number of Roman Catholic pupils 
			 Nursery 27 8 14 
			 Primary  (Year 1–Year 7) 196 68 98 
		
	
	From 1 September 2002 seven pupils have left the school.

Waterways Ireland: Date of Establishment

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the statement in Waterways Ireland's annual report for 1999–2000 that it was set up by legislation in the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom on 2 December 1999 is correct.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Waterways Ireland and the other five implementation bodies were in fact established by an agreement made on 8 March 1999 between the British and Irish Governments. The provisions of that agreement were incorporated into the domestic law of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland by the legislation referred in the Waterways Ireland annual report for 1999–2000. The agreement and the legislation came into force on 2 December 1999.

Central African Republic: Assistance toHIV Sufferers

Baroness Rawlings: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What assistance, if any, they are offering to HIV sufferers in the Central African Republic.

Baroness Amos: We are not providing any direct assistance to HIV sufferers in the Central African Republic (CAR). The Department for International Development assistance to CAR is provided through multilateral channels, including UN agences and the EU (of which DfID's share is approximately 19 per cent).

Belfast Agreement: Letter from Chief Commissioner of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Committee

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they agree with the Chief Commissioner of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Committee, who in a letter of 11 November to the Northern Ireland Court Service indicated that the Belfast Agreement requires the abolition of references to the Sovereign and neutrality and inclusiveness in the administration of justice.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Correspondence of this type would normally be treated in confidence. I do not therefore propose to comment on the detail of what is in the commissioner's letter of 11 November except to say it relates to a number of draft amendments to the Coroners Rules in Northern Ireland which are under consideration, including an amendment to the form of oath to be taken by a juror in a Coroners Court in Northern Ireland. The commissioner's views are of course a matter for him, but I do not understand his letter to say that the removal of references to the Sovereign is a requirement of the Belfast Agreement.

Management of Private Office Papers

Lord Henley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What guidance they give to departments as to how they should retain copies of correspondence between Ministers and Members of Parliament relating to constituency problems.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Ministers' official papers, including correspondence with Members of Parliament relating to the work of departments, are public records. In common with all public records, they are reviewed for disposal or preservation in line with the requirements of the Public Records Acts 1958 and 1967, the latter of which established the 30-year rule. The Public Record Office has published guidance entitled Management of Private Office Papers, which is available on the Public Record Office website at: www.pro.gov.uk/recordsmanagement/standards/privateoffice. Copies of this guidance will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.